the science of improving a human population by controlled breeding to increase the occurrence of desirable heritable characteristics. Developed largely by Francis Galton as a method of improving the human race, it fell into disfavor only after the perversion of its doctrines by the Nazis.
Although you may not be familiar with the name Sir Francis Galton, you are probably familiar with his work. He made some of the earliest advances in the science of genetics, and theorized things like the existance of DNA and the inheritance of intelligence - things that would not be proven until decades after his death in 1911. Galton's work earned him knighthood in 1909, and many of his theories and inventions are still in use today, more than a century later. Galton invented the standard deviation, the pachinko machine, a classification system for fingerprints, the first weather map, and he coined the terms "eugenics" and "nature vs. nurture." His true passion was in the study of intelligence, to which he devoted much of his study, and from which came many other important theories and discoveries.
So with all his efforts to improve the human race, all his contributions and inventions and development of new sciences, why don't we teach every schoolchild about this man?
Before we answer that question, why don't you take this little quiz, and see if Sir Francis Galton would consider you good human "stock," fit for breeding:
The quiz passcode is "gifted"
Don't be surprised if you didn't score well enough to have children. See, Galton's theories on eugenics and ways to improve the human race through "selective breeding" sound pretty good on paper. Kind of like the geneticist makes "designer babies" sound pretty good in this clip from Gattaca:
...but in practice, the idea of selectively breeding humans to pass on "desirable" characteristics could very well end up more like Kate in My Sister's Keeper:
When we breed dogs or cats or horses for specific qualities, we don't think twice about selecting the puppies with the best coloration, the smartest kittens, or the most agile foals. We match those exemplars of their breed to one another, and hope that by crossing their genetic lines together, we'll end up with an even better example of the breed. We have dog shows and breed standards so exacting it's a high honor to own the dog who most closely matches its breed standard.
Because all living things have DNA, and all living things pass on their genetic traits to their offspring, humans could, of course, be bred in the exact same way. And therein lies the first problem. We are human, not animals.
Eugenics is the idea of breeding humans to create a society of ideal specimens. When you breed a dog, it's easy to spay or neuter an "undesirable" puppy. If you want to get the same success with breeding humans, you have to use the same methods - that is, you have to castrate men or oophorectomize women. And if they disagree, then you have to do it by force.
That disagreement brings us to the second problem: Who determines which qualities are "ideal"?
Galton said the most important qualities were "a sound mind and body, enlightened, [...] with an intelligence above the average, [...] combined with a natural capacity and zeal for work" (Galton, 1910). In another article, Galton lists "health, energy, ability, manliness, and courteous disposition" (Galton, 1904). His view of these very subjective qualities included the things you saw in the quiz - income, education level, race and ethnicity, socioeconomic background, ancestry, and health - things we now know have no bearing on intelligence or fitness to breed.
But just because we now know Galton's ideas were less than intellectual, they still had a major impact on the world. The most obvious and infamous example of eugenics in practice came from the Nazis, who, of course, decided that the "final solution" was to kill off those people who were unfit to procreate. But closer to home, right here in America, we drove the eugenics bandwagon with the much more "humane" practices of forced steralizations - some of which were not discontinued until the 1980s.
Although you may not be familiar with the name Sir Francis Galton, you are probably familiar with his work. He made some of the earliest advances in the science of genetics, and theorized things like the existance of DNA and the inheritance of intelligence - things that would not be proven until decades after his death in 1911. Galton's work earned him knighthood in 1909, and many of his theories and inventions are still in use today, more than a century later. Galton invented the standard deviation, the pachinko machine, a classification system for fingerprints, the first weather map, and he coined the terms "eugenics" and "nature vs. nurture." His true passion was in the study of intelligence, to which he devoted much of his study, and from which came many other important theories and discoveries.
So with all his efforts to improve the human race, all his contributions and inventions and development of new sciences, why don't we teach every schoolchild about this man?
Before we answer that question, why don't you take this little quiz, and see if Sir Francis Galton would consider you good human "stock," fit for breeding:
The quiz passcode is "gifted"
Don't be surprised if you didn't score well enough to have children. See, Galton's theories on eugenics and ways to improve the human race through "selective breeding" sound pretty good on paper. Kind of like the geneticist makes "designer babies" sound pretty good in this clip from Gattaca:
...but in practice, the idea of selectively breeding humans to pass on "desirable" characteristics could very well end up more like Kate in My Sister's Keeper:
When we breed dogs or cats or horses for specific qualities, we don't think twice about selecting the puppies with the best coloration, the smartest kittens, or the most agile foals. We match those exemplars of their breed to one another, and hope that by crossing their genetic lines together, we'll end up with an even better example of the breed. We have dog shows and breed standards so exacting it's a high honor to own the dog who most closely matches its breed standard.
Because all living things have DNA, and all living things pass on their genetic traits to their offspring, humans could, of course, be bred in the exact same way. And therein lies the first problem. We are human, not animals.
Eugenics is the idea of breeding humans to create a society of ideal specimens. When you breed a dog, it's easy to spay or neuter an "undesirable" puppy. If you want to get the same success with breeding humans, you have to use the same methods - that is, you have to castrate men or oophorectomize women. And if they disagree, then you have to do it by force.
That disagreement brings us to the second problem: Who determines which qualities are "ideal"?
Galton said the most important qualities were "a sound mind and body, enlightened, [...] with an intelligence above the average, [...] combined with a natural capacity and zeal for work" (Galton, 1910). In another article, Galton lists "health, energy, ability, manliness, and courteous disposition" (Galton, 1904). His view of these very subjective qualities included the things you saw in the quiz - income, education level, race and ethnicity, socioeconomic background, ancestry, and health - things we now know have no bearing on intelligence or fitness to breed.
But just because we now know Galton's ideas were less than intellectual, they still had a major impact on the world. The most obvious and infamous example of eugenics in practice came from the Nazis, who, of course, decided that the "final solution" was to kill off those people who were unfit to procreate. But closer to home, right here in America, we drove the eugenics bandwagon with the much more "humane" practices of forced steralizations - some of which were not discontinued until the 1980s.
Bibliography
Galton, F. (1910). Eugenic qualities of primary importance. Eugenics Review, 1, 74-76. Retrieved from http://galton.org/essays/1900-1911/galton-1910-eugenics-review-qualities.pdf
Galton, F. (1904). Eugenics: Its definition, scope, and aims. The American Journal of Sociology, X(1), Retrieved from http://www.galton.org/essays/1900-1911/galton-1904-am-hourn-soc-eugenics-scope-aims.htm